Conventional content distribution systems assume that a device to which content is to be distributed will have an Internet connection. A content provider may therefore configure their content distribution based on the assumption that all requests for content will come directly from the devices to which the content is to be provided. While the requests for content may transit Internet infrastructure, conventional content providers assume that real-time, two-way communications with the content requestor will be available. Thus, conventional content distribution systems may employ sophisticated authentication, authorization, and error checking approaches that rely on real-time, two-way communications. While this model works appropriately for many users, this conventional approach has limited, if any, applicability to a vast number of users of digital devices who do not have consistent, always-on, high-speed, two-way Internet connectivity.
There are approximately 7.2 billion people in the world. There are also approximately 1.5 billion cellular phones and smart phones. For many people, instant-access high-speed real-time connectivity is the norm. For billions of other people, once a day or even once a week email, social media interaction, or other “connectivity” would be revolutionary. Devices (e.g., smart phones, tablets, laptops, computers, game systems) that are able to connect to the Internet seem to be nearly ubiquitous. Whether walking the streets of San Francisco, hiking in the remote high Andes, trekking to parts unknown in Outer Mongolia, sitting in a coffee shop in Seattle, or taking a restful weekend in Amish country in Ohio, there is likely to be a connection enabled device nearby (e.g., in your hand). While devices are nearly ubiquitous, connectivity is not. Connectivity continues to reach deeper into even the farthest corners of the world, but there are still coverage gaps. Popular television commercials in the United States compare coverage maps for various carriers. All the coverage maps reveal significant gaps. In addition to actual gaps, where there is simply no connectivity infrastructure, gaps may be practical or economic, where connectivity is too expensive, too slow, or too insecure to be practically or economically useful.
Since devices are nearly everywhere, and since connectivity is not yet everywhere, devices that are used to communicating frequently with the Internet may be forced to function at a reduced level when connectivity is not available. While this reduced functionality may be inconvenient at times, it may be economically or even physically dangerous at others. For example, not being able to watch the most recent version of a television show may be inconvenient while not being able to receive the most recent update to a map or to receive an urgent weather bulletin may be physically dangerous. Not being able to receive the most recent security update or encryption update may be economically dangerous. Regardless of whether the reduced capability is dangerous or just annoying, the loss of connectivity reduces the utility of mobile devices.